Dáil debates

Thursday, 16 June 2005

3:00 pm

Photo of Jimmy DeenihanJimmy Deenihan (Kerry North, Fine Gael)

What lease obligations were not fulfilled by Dublin Waterworld? How did the €10 million VAT liability arise? Why does Dublin Waterworld have to pay this liability? Is the Minister satisfied this VAT was owed?

One of the reasons Dublin Waterworld refused to pay rent was because it claimed the building was defective. It has forwarded a number of defects in the building to Campus Stadium Ireland Development Limited. The company had sought in the past to have these defects corrected and it refused to pay rent until the issue was resolved. The rent money was held in a fund and now some of this money is being paid. Can the Minister clarify that the building was defective in some aspects? Who supervised the design and construction of the centre on behalf of the Government? Who signed off on the design and construction of the roof on behalf of the Government? The judge in the case made reference to Dublin Waterworld not being a substantial company. Why did CSID sign a contract with such a company at that time? Did Dublin Waterworld fulfil all the criteria? Were the proper procedures followed through? It seems Dublin Waterworld won the competition set out by the Department.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.